Across the horizon: the rising sun and endless possibilities
 
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z

Home - Studyworld Studynotes - Quotes - Reports & Essays 

 

STUDYWORLD STUDYNOTES:

CLASSIC LITERATURE ANALYSIS

STUDYWORLD REPORTS & ESSAYS

RESEARCH AND IDEA DATABASE




Oakwood Publishing Company:

SAT; ACT; GRE

Study Material


xx

 


History

Science

Biography

Creative Writing

Literature

Social Issues

Music and Art
Reports & Essays: Social Issues - Political

"AND""OR"

The ABC's of Government Planning
When governments are planning, they should not hamper the economic development of a country by worrying about the quality of life and other environmental concerns. The economy should be put ahead of all else. Money spent on protecting the environment is better spent on projects to encourage economic development. With a good economy, the disposal of garbage and toxic waste is made much easier. The government should make economic development the highest priority. By using the environment to their advantage, they will be able to increase the economy even more. For instance, if they were to give large permits to loggers, the loggers would then be able to cut more trees, thus increasing the economy. For those who say that people should not cut trees because they are the source of the oxygen we need to breathe, remember that the "seaweed in the ocean is the largest producer of oxygen and the largest user of carbon dioxide" (Dietz 34). When compared to seaweed, trees are small potatoes in terms of the amount of oxygen produced. It is best to not worry about the environment, while pursuing economic growth; it has lasted this long so it will make it through us also. "Many people have lost their jobs because someone decided that you can no longer do something to the environment." (Hellyer 22). This was recently the case in Newfoundland when the government decided that the fishers could no longer fish. For many this was a deadly blow as fishing was all they knew and now they have no way of making an income. This is just one of many examples of how giving the environment a higher priority than the economy has negative effects. Once a good economy has been created, people can then go back and help the environment. It must be done in this order for numerous reasons. One such reason is that a healthy environment will help no one, unless there is a thriving economy to go with it. "But getting a good environment with a good economy is extremely hard." (Kerr 174). On the other side of the coin, creating an environment after there is a thriving economy is much easier. When one has a good economy, it does not matter what states the environment is in. Once we have achieved a strong economy, we can then focus more on the environment. Lately, we have been searching for places to dispose of our garbage. If we were to all truck it to the Grand Canyon and dump it there, are problem would be solved. The Grand Canyon offers an almost limitless amount of space for dumping our tremendous amount of garbage. There will be those who complain that it is a major tourist attraction, so it should be left alone. However, all the Grand Canyon is is a giant hole in the ground. If you are the type of person who would miss looking at a hole, then grab yourself a shovel and head out to your backyard. If you do not feel like digging a hole that big, dig a small one then use a magnifying glass to increase the size of it. By doing this, we solve our garbage problem and allow everyone to have a tourist attraction in their own yard. We even increase the transfer of money among private citizens (you can charge money to people who want to look at your hole, and you could sell the dirt from your hole as top soil). Another bonus of having a robust economy, is that we can afford to properly dispose of toxic waste. This idea has been proposed numerous times in the last few years but always greeted with a negative response do to the money involved. Now however, with the economy flourishing so much, we can afford to jettison the toxic waste into the sun. The technology for this has been around for years but has always been cost prohibitive. Having a good economy will also allow us to help society as a whole. With all the money we will have, people should help those who are less fortunate, we will not but we should. We will be able to reduce poverty. There will also be more money to spend on education and health care. This spending in turn will make the next generation better and stronger than the one before them. As long as the economy is arranged to be more important then the environment, the country as a whole will flourish. Once we have secured a booming economy, we will be able to put out attention to other areas of interest and concern. If you are the type to forget which order they should be put in, simply turn to the alphabet, "ec" from economy comes before "en" from environment. Simple right. I leave you now to ponder what I said with this song to reinstate my views. Works Cited Dietz, Thomas and James McEvoy III. Handbook for Environmental Planning: The Social Consequences of Environmental Change. New York: Wiley Inc., 1977. Hellyer, Paul. Funney Money: A Common Sense Alternative to Mailline Economics. Toronto: Chimo Media Limited, 1994. Kerr, M. Anne. Environment-Economy Integration: Introducing the Concept. Toronto: McCormiks Ltd., 1987. Python, Monty. The Fairly Incomplete and Rather Badly Illustrated Monty Python Song Book. Great Britain: Python Productions Ltd, 1994.

 



Teacher Ratings: See what

others think

of your teachers



Copy Right